nanog mailing list archives
Re: is this true or... ?
From: Jack Bates <jbates () brightok net>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 09:35:09 -0600
Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
but there may be session state -- it's bill HB 2121) only criminalizes the conduct if it's done "with intent to harm or defraud a communications service provider". Now, given the anti-NAT and anti-VPN tendencies of somebroadband ISPs, I'm not necessarily thrilled, but it's not quite the same as was originally suggested.
Without looking it up (a little busy), there should be a Definitions section defining communications service provider. Is the bill aimed at ISP's or is it aimed at the actual Telco?
-Jack *probably just creating noise*
Current thread:
- is this true or... ? Tomas Daniska (Mar 28)
- Re: is this true or... ? Steven M. Bellovin (Mar 28)
- Re: is this true or... ? Steven M. Bellovin (Mar 28)
- Re: is this true or... ? Jack Bates (Mar 28)
- Re: is this true or... ? Steven M. Bellovin (Mar 28)
- Re: is this true or... ? Scott W Brim (Mar 28)
- Re: is this true or... ? Steven M. Bellovin (Mar 28)
- Re: is this true or... ? Richard Irving (Mar 28)
- Re: is this true or... ? Steven M. Bellovin (Mar 28)
- Re: is this true or... ? batz (Mar 28)
- Re: is this true or... ? Steven M. Bellovin (Mar 28)
- Re: is this true or... ? Sean Donelan (Mar 28)
- Re: is this true or... ? Richard Irving (Mar 28)
- Re: is this true or... ? Valdis . Kletnieks (Mar 28)
- Re: is this true or... ? Nathan E Norman (Mar 28)